Key Points

• Citizen-driven efforts to protect cash have accelerated, from rural Australia to England, pushing back against cashless policies and the erosion of cash access — often forcing governments and institutions to respond.
• Public pressure is capable of producing real policy outcomes, including Switzerland’s 2026 constitutional vote on cash protections, Australia’s moratorium on regional bank closures until 2027, and the UK’s new FCA rules requiring banks to maintain reasonable access to cash services.
• Concerns about equity, resilience, and security are driving the movement, as citizens warn that cashless systems exclude vulnerable groups, increase exposure to fraud and outages, and undermine privacy — reinforcing the need for cash as a universal, reliable payment option.

In a movement that is broad, increasingly organized, and grounded in concerns about equity, citizens around the world continue to push back against policies that sideline cash and restrict consumer choice. There is push-back on several fronts, but especially against a troublesome rise in "cashless" businesses and in opposition to the removal of the physical infrastructure required to get cash, resulting in “banking deserts.”

Switzerland now stands at the forefront of the global movement, with a major constitutional vote scheduled for March 8, 2026. The popular initiative “Cash is Freedom” would require that coins or banknotes can only be replaced by another currency if both the people and the cantons approve the change. The Swiss Parliament opposes the initiative but has unanimously approved a counter proposal that would also enshrine the availability of cash and the Swiss franc in the constitution. Concern over cash protection mobilized civil society groups who frame cash as essential for privacy, crisis resilience, and democratic control — and both proposals aim to guarantee that physical money remains a protected part of Swiss life, even as digital payments rise.

Elsewhere, public frustration with cashless policies and accessibility continue to surface.

In Australia, the grassroots “Cash Only Week” campaign gained traction on social media, encouraging consumers to push back against rising card fees, surcharges, and businesses that legally refuse cash. The campaign even asked people to make large ATM withdrawals to drain bank reserves and send a message to financial institutions that cash is still needed in society. (“Cash protest to 'drain ATMs' today in defiant act against controversial trend,' Yahoo Finance, April 21, 2025.) When a Subway store in Tasmania announced in 2025 that it would no longer accept cash, local reporting said “people were so outraged by the decision to ditch cash that they were calling for others to boycott the store.” (“Subway’s cashless move sparks outrage as fast food chain joins growing trend: 'Bad mistake,” Yahoo Audtraliia, May 2025.)

Additionally, some rural communities have mounted sustained resistance to the disappearance of in-person banking. The town of Junee in New South Wales is a case in point, where residents staged protests in 2023 after the Commonwealth Bank announced the closure of their last remaining branch, citing poor digital connectivity and the exclusion of elderly and digitally limited customers. The public backlash helped trigger a Senate inquiry into regional bank closures, and in 2025 the federal government secured a national agreement from the Big Four banks — Commonwealth Bank, ANZ, NAB, and Westpac — to halt all regional branch closures until July 2027. It’s a near-term win for rural residents, but the deferral suggests that continued public pressure will be necessary to permanently safeguard access to banking surfaces in rural communities. (“Regional bank closure moratorium,” About Regional, Feb. 16, 2025.)

In England, the power of public opinion is reflected in new Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) rules protecting access to cash, which came into force in September 2024. The rules require banks to ensure that communities retain reasonable access to withdrawal and deposit services, and is a direct response to sustained campaigning by consumer groups and widespread public anxiety about “cash deserts” resulting from ATM and bank branch closures. (“New FCA rules to protect access to cash already having an impact,” FCA, Sept. 2024.)

Beyond economics and security, the fight by citizens to preserve cash is rooted in deep concerns about privacy, fairness, and resilience.

Citizen groups fighting for cash protections have had setbacks, however. We previously reported on a lawsuit in the U.S. against the National Park Service’s cashless entrance fee policy to dozens of national parks, historic sites, and monuments. Recently, a federal judge dismissed the case, ruling the plaintiffs lacked standing because they failed to prove direct injury. The ruling does allow plaintiffs to amend their complaint, however, keeping the legal question alive and drawing national attention to the exclusionary effects of cashless public services. (“National parks can continue to refuse cash as payment,” Legal Newswire, Dec. 5, 2025.)

Security concerns continue to drive public resistance to cashless systems. Research from Nigeria highlights widespread fear of fraud in digital payment ecosystems, leading many consumers to prefer cash for safety. Citizens even took to the streets to protest the nation’s cash shortage, objecting to their government’s implementation of a central bank digital currency (“Nigerians’ Rejection of Their CBDC Is a Cautionary Tale for Other Countries,” Cato Institute, March 6, 2023).  

Studies in Asia similarly point to rising anxiety over identity theft, data breaches, and the vulnerabilities of electronic payment systems. Technical failures — from app outages to system downtime — further erode trust, reminding consumers that digital payments introduce single points of failure.

Beyond economics and security, the fight by citizens to preserve cash is rooted in deep concerns about privacy, fairness, and resilience. The American Civil Liberties Union in the U.S. has long warned that cashless systems can exclude the poor, elderly, undocumented, and those without stable banking access. Digital payments also create detailed transaction records, raising privacy concerns. And because credit card systems transfer wealth from low income to high income households through fees and rewards, cashless environments can exacerbate inequality.

What Can Consumers Do?

Advocacy groups recommend that consumers confronted with cashless policies voice their objections, ask that complaints be shared with management, and — when possible — decline to complete purchases if cash is refused without clear advance notice. They also encourage citizens to contact elected representatives and support legislation that protects the right to pay in cash or ensures necessary access to cash infrastructure.

‍